1. The admitted facts in this case are that the respondent, on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from service on 30th June, 2002. However, vide order dated 28th June, 2002 (i.e., two days before his retirement) served on the respondent on 29th June, 2002, he was placed under suspension. Thereafter, chargesheet was issued leveling the allegations that the respondent had, sometime in May, 1995, fraudulently withdrawn money as loan from the GPF accounts of two other employees namely Ganga Popli and Maya Devi. According to the petitioner, the respondent did not accept the chargesheet when it was sought to be served upon him, and therefore, notice thereof was published in the newspapers ‘The Statesman’ (English) and ‘Qaumi Awaz’ (Urdu) on 15th September, 2006 and ‘Punjab Kesari’ (Hindi) on 16.9.2006. It resulted in the punishment order dated 26th February, 2007 whereby the Disciplinary Authority imposed penalty of 66% cut for life time from the pension of the respondent.

2. O.A. No.551/2010 preferred by the respondent has been allowed by the Tribunal vide impugned order dated 17th September, 2010 holding that the service of chargesheet in 2005, i.e., after the retire